Psychometric approaches to language testing and linguistic profiling: – A complementary relationship?

Research output: Contributions to collected editions/worksContributions to collected editions/anthologiesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Psychometric approaches to language testing and linguistic profiling: – A complementary relationship? / Hagenfeld, Katharina.
Developing, Modelling and Assessing Second Languages: Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching. ed. / Jörg Keßler; Anke Lenzing; Mathias Liebner. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2016. p. 135-162 https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.5.07hag.

Research output: Contributions to collected editions/worksContributions to collected editions/anthologiesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Hagenfeld, K 2016, Psychometric approaches to language testing and linguistic profiling: – A complementary relationship? in J Keßler, A Lenzing & M Liebner (eds), Developing, Modelling and Assessing Second Languages: Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching., https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.5.07hag, John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 135-162.

APA

Hagenfeld, K. (2016). Psychometric approaches to language testing and linguistic profiling: – A complementary relationship? In J. Keßler, A. Lenzing, & M. Liebner (Eds.), Developing, Modelling and Assessing Second Languages: Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching (pp. 135-162). Article https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.5.07hag John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Vancouver

Hagenfeld K. Psychometric approaches to language testing and linguistic profiling: – A complementary relationship? In Keßler J, Lenzing A, Liebner M, editors, Developing, Modelling and Assessing Second Languages: Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 2016. p. 135-162. https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.5.07hag

Bibtex

@inbook{746ac5a9340c48a3ab4dc9b9d2943856,
title = "Psychometric approaches to language testing and linguistic profiling: – A complementary relationship?",
abstract = "The present study investigates as to whether and to what extent Linguistic Profiling can complement shortcomings of proficiency rating scales that are based on the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (CoE 2001). In order to shed light on possible interfaces between the second language acquisition theory Processability Theory (PT) (Pienemann 1998, 2005) and the CEFR, learners were rated according to the CEFR and diagnosed with two linguistic profiling tools: Rapid Profile (Mackey, Pienemann, & Thornton 1991; Pienemann & Mackey 1993; Ke{\ss}ler 2006, 2008) and Autoprofile (Lin 2012). The emergence criterion (Pienemann 1998; Pallotti 2007) as used in PT as the starting point to determine acquisition is highly predictive in nature and thus taken as the point of departure of an integration of PT into the CEFR. The results show correspondences between CEFR levels and PT stages and suggest a reexamination of early CEFR levels in terms of the complexity of operations beginning learners are assumed to manage.",
keywords = "Didactics of English as a foreign language",
author = "Katharina Hagenfeld",
year = "2016",
month = jun,
day = "29",
language = "English",
isbn = "ISBN 9789027203052",
pages = "135--162",
editor = "J{\"o}rg Ke{\ss}ler and Anke Lenzing and Mathias Liebner",
booktitle = "Developing, Modelling and Assessing Second Languages",
publisher = "John Benjamins Publishing Company",
address = "Netherlands",

}

RIS

TY - CHAP

T1 - Psychometric approaches to language testing and linguistic profiling

T2 - – A complementary relationship?

AU - Hagenfeld, Katharina

PY - 2016/6/29

Y1 - 2016/6/29

N2 - The present study investigates as to whether and to what extent Linguistic Profiling can complement shortcomings of proficiency rating scales that are based on the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (CoE 2001). In order to shed light on possible interfaces between the second language acquisition theory Processability Theory (PT) (Pienemann 1998, 2005) and the CEFR, learners were rated according to the CEFR and diagnosed with two linguistic profiling tools: Rapid Profile (Mackey, Pienemann, & Thornton 1991; Pienemann & Mackey 1993; Keßler 2006, 2008) and Autoprofile (Lin 2012). The emergence criterion (Pienemann 1998; Pallotti 2007) as used in PT as the starting point to determine acquisition is highly predictive in nature and thus taken as the point of departure of an integration of PT into the CEFR. The results show correspondences between CEFR levels and PT stages and suggest a reexamination of early CEFR levels in terms of the complexity of operations beginning learners are assumed to manage.

AB - The present study investigates as to whether and to what extent Linguistic Profiling can complement shortcomings of proficiency rating scales that are based on the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (CoE 2001). In order to shed light on possible interfaces between the second language acquisition theory Processability Theory (PT) (Pienemann 1998, 2005) and the CEFR, learners were rated according to the CEFR and diagnosed with two linguistic profiling tools: Rapid Profile (Mackey, Pienemann, & Thornton 1991; Pienemann & Mackey 1993; Keßler 2006, 2008) and Autoprofile (Lin 2012). The emergence criterion (Pienemann 1998; Pallotti 2007) as used in PT as the starting point to determine acquisition is highly predictive in nature and thus taken as the point of departure of an integration of PT into the CEFR. The results show correspondences between CEFR levels and PT stages and suggest a reexamination of early CEFR levels in terms of the complexity of operations beginning learners are assumed to manage.

KW - Didactics of English as a foreign language

M3 - Contributions to collected editions/anthologies

SN - ISBN 9789027203052

SP - 135

EP - 162

BT - Developing, Modelling and Assessing Second Languages

A2 - Keßler, Jörg

A2 - Lenzing, Anke

A2 - Liebner, Mathias

PB - John Benjamins Publishing Company

ER -